- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 15:38:48 +0100
- To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Cc: "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
To test my understanding...
At 10:27 AM 10/7/02 +0300, Patrick Stickler wrote:
>
>Given Dan's proposed rdf:format which provides lexical
>constraints on inlined literals, does the following entailment
>hold:
>
>IF
> Jenny age "10" .
> Bob age "10.0" .
> age rdf:format xsd:integer .
>THEN
> Jenny age _:x .
> Bob age _:x .
No.
>Or, how about
>
>IF
> Jenny age "10" .
> Bob shoesize "10" .
> age rdf:format xsd:integer .
> shoesize rdf:format xsd:byte .
>THEN
> Jenny age _:x .
> Bob age _:x .
No, but YES to this:
Jenny age _:x .
Bob shoesize _:x .
>I expect that the answer will be that the first entailment
>does not hold, the second does, and that in actuality
>rdf:format has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not
>two lexical forms are considered equal or not.
Yup.
>I.e., it's just tidy with lexical constraints, and as such,
>it's not really a new or different proposal, but just a superset
>of the current tidy proposal.
Not "superset" as I understand the term, but a variation, yes.
#g
-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Monday, 7 October 2002 10:30:25 UTC